birdog1960

edward kennedy was one of the biggest supporters of the aca and very important to it's passage. http://articles.courant.com/2012-04-01/news/hc-op-ted-kennedy-health-care-legacy-0401-20120401_1_health-insurance-health-care-coverage-aca he consistently voted with liberals. jfk http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115522/jfk-was-unapologetic-liberal and robert http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/06/robert-kennedy-assassination-anniversary were most definitely liberals, then or now. and massachusettes is very liberal and very Catholic. there are also numerous examples of liberal Christian and Catholic clergy. many have spent time in prison for their beliefs. there's an elderly nun in prison right now that may well not survive her incarceration.

as usual, you are just plain wrong. there are plenty of liberal Christians and specifically liberal Catholics. you're arguing with one right now. mass. is the most catholic state in the union and one of the most liberal. witrh 45% catholics, more than a few must be liberal. oh , yeah and that kennedy family...

i'm missing the eloquence and amazing grace. perhaps i need to watch ken burns doc again.

pray tell… explain to me how they weren't traitors.

amazing grace, amazing prose. i don't think there has ever been a more eloquent president. if anyone misses his point here, it's from willful neglect. he died because of these statements and beliefs. people are still dying for them.

live and let live. not like they're likely to propagate the species. it's an unsustainable model but i don't really care. my belief is most folks are born that way. there is most certainly a spectrum of maleness and femaleness. it's not a conscious decision to live a difficult and ultimately sterile life.

cool. if we can all agree there's a problem then maybe we can agree to some measures that will at least slow the damage. i wonder what he thought of the movie "noah". i'm guessing he would have been one of those gorging on the animals collected for the ark if he had around back then. would have needed his ass burned by a flaming bush to get the gist. strange movie tho that just didn't quite work.

i explained how i could square it. if everyone using the mechanism were buying only shotguns for the uses i described, closing the loophole would be unnecessary. unfortunately, it's not. but they understood that also. it was about silly pimping. as i've said before, when in rome... back on topic: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/26/opinion/david-brooks-the-robert-e-lee-problem.html?action=click&contentCollection=Your%20Money&module=MostEmailed&version=Full&region=Marginalia&src=me&pgtype=article. an excellent op ed by david brooks. he treats the flag question as a no brainer. he saves the analysis for gen lee. That culture is transmitted through the generations by the things we honor or don’t honor, by the symbols and names we celebrate and don’t celebrate. If we want to reduce racism we have to elevate the symbols that signify the struggle against racism and devalue the symbols that signify its acceptance. Lowering the Confederate flag from public properties is thus an easy call. There are plenty of ways to celebrate Southern heritage and Southern life without choosing one so enmeshed in the fight to preserve slavery.

i think he was talking about private individuals as sellers. try to keep up.

here's the thing: i have a difficult time believing that alaska dimwit and 3rd eye didn't realize that this was the loophole i was referencing then there's this from my link (appropriately referenced) June of 2000, ATF published a study of 1,530 firearms trafficking investigations conducted during the period July 1996 – December 1998. That study, Following the Gun: Enforcing Federal Laws Against Firearm Traffickers,6 found that straw purchasing was the most common channel of illegal gun trafficking, accounting for almost one-half (46%) of all investigations, and associated with nearly 26,000 illegally trafficked firearms

the right to sell guns? hmmm, give me a second...nope. close the loophole.

that's what i thought as well. and there is the loop-hole. although the bigger problem appears to reside with unscrupulous dealers. who woulda thunk it - less than honorable people in arms trade?

what does this mean. i ask in all seriousness. i have no idea if the guy that got my gun has an ffl (or was even in the ffa, actually i think the latter is pretty likely). if he isn't an ffl, could he legally do the transaction that i described?

re substantive arguments on this issue, i'm inclined to let any readers decide for themselves. i think the cause for outrage in your position is, in lincoln's words, self evident. re gun laws, the specifics re straw gun purchases are not key to my argument. the fact that gun shows and flea markets are the centers for most of this activity is: :Gun shows and flea markets are a “major venue for illegal trafficking”8 and thus have been the target of law enforcement trafficking and straw purchasing investigations. During ATF’s investigations of gun shows, the agency found that FFLs committed numerous federal crimes at shows, including facilitating straw purchases.9 Subsequent ATF investigations at gun shows from 2004 – 2006 uncovered “widespread” straw purchasing at shows, where guns were diverted to “convicted felons and local and international gangs.”10" http://smartgunlaws.org/straw-purchases-policy-summary/

i guess we shouldn't be surprised by the outrageous views on any number of subjects given the views exhibited in this thread.

if the revolutionary war was primarily about slavery, then yes, the symbols from the side supporting that afront to human dignity would necessarily need to be considered racist.

why does the distinction matter in this context then. the battle flag was used in a war about slaves and therefore has racist symbology. donne. qed.

therefore, you acxcept this assertion: "Ultimately, slavery caused the Civil War, Ayers said, not conflict over constitutional rights"?

you might want to rub elbows with this guy...try the president's office at univ of richmond. http://www.hwchronicle.com/news/civil-war-expert-speaks-on-sesquicentennial/ Slavery was so economically desirable that some states were unwilling to give it up, Ayers told students. He also explained that slavery might not have ended for another century had the Civil War not occured. “It’s not progress,” Ayers said. “It’s not the natural course of American history. It’s by the skin of our teeth.” Ultimately, slavery caused the Civil War, Ayers said, not conflict over constitutional rights

missed this til now. a really interesting but terribly flawed argument. distilled to its essence it says: ignore weighing evidence if a potential conclusion from that evidence will conflict with your political beliefs. wow. that's the thinking i see here repeatedly in a nutshell.

from bush's epa chief: http://weather.climate25.com/project/william-k-reilly/ “I really have to question,” says William K. Reilly, “how a candidate for national office now, can deny that the climate is changing…and still be taken seriously.” Reilly, who served as EPA Administrator under George H.W. Bush, sees hope, though, in potentially unlikely places.

i really like licorice. i'm liking the current supreme court more and more.

scalia is becoming irrelevant almost as quickly as the confederate flag.

those 2 are certainly in abundant evidence here

wonder what makes them such beacons of hope. i thought this interview did a good job explaining the continued prevalence of the white supremacist movement: http://www.npr.org/2015/06/24/417045112/narrative-change-makes-white-supremacy-groups-more-dangerous-expert-says. basically it's about demographics. from 20% nonwhite to 40% in 40 years. and the backlash can in part be explained by "if they get more, i get less". same as for the aca or socialized medicine imo. GREENE: And what's drawing people might be a new narrative, one that seems to capture Dylann Roof. It's the idea that racial diversity is threatening the survival of white people.